*yawn* waiting for credible well thought out argument with numbers as hard evidence post to nerf AR's

if I was filimg it I would show, but I have a heavy dropsuit fitting with 100 shield 953 armour and a guy in proto with a kill switch Gek dropped in the instant he seen me

if I was filimg it I would show, but I have a heavy dropsuit fitting with 100 shield 953 armour and a guy in proto with a kill switch Gek dropped in the instant he seen me

if I was filimg it I would show, but I have a heavy dropsuit fitting with 100 shield 953 armour and a guy in proto with a kill switch Gek dropped in the instant he seen me

Thats not the AR that's the damage mods

Iff thats the case I'm going gek and damage mods, goin tank hunting

Seriously when a guy with a gek does 1000dmg in 1 secon, weapons OP

Ok so I don't have the game screen in front of me right now so let's see if I can do this from memory. (Just base stats of the weapon, not counting proficiency and weaponry upgrades or damage mods)

Prototype AR does what, 34 damage per bullet, at roughly 750 rpm, that works out to 750/60=12.5 bullets/sec @ 34 damage each = 34x12.5=425 damage per sec. 34 damage per bullet x 60 in the mag = 2040 per mag. 60 sec / 12.5 bullets per sec = empty mag in 4.8 sec.

Standard HMG does 19 damage per bullet, fires at roughly 2000 rpm, that works out to 2000/60sec = 33.33333333333 (we will say 33.3) bullets/sec @ 19 damage per bullet = 19x33.3= 632.7 damage per sec. 19 damage x 450? in the mag (overheat if constant fire leaves about 120 left) so 330 = 6270 damage per full mag to overheat.

You claim that your suit has an EHP of 1053 and he's dropping you instantly, assuming he lands every shot it requires 1053 EHP / 425 damage per sec = 2.477 sec of sustained fire with 100% accuracy to kill your suit.

The standard HMG does 3.07x more damage per full sustained fire cycle than the prototype AR, and 1.4887x damage over the prototype AR per sec.

Inside each weapons optimal range, you are dead regardless if you can land every shot.
The problem you are having is because of damage mods (which can be applied to both of these types of weapons I have listed)

How does the AR need a nerf?

Rethink your situation and how you got killed, learn from it, learn to counter it instead of just posting yet another stupid "Nerf X because it kills me in Y suit" thread.

TL;DR - READ IT BEFORE YOU MAKE ANOTHER STUPID POST PLEASE.
Also, if there are any errors in actual game values of just the weapons before enhancements (skills or mods) keep in mind this is just from memory and not having any in game into in front of me.

Seriously when a guy with a gek does 1000dmg in 1 secon, weapons OP

Seriously when a guy with a gek does 1000dmg in 1 secon, weapons OP

ANOTHER Edit: The only counter to an Assault Rifle is another Assault Rifle as it can be used by any dropsuit, is incredibly versatile (as previously stated) and it doesn't take hardly anything to kill the opposition. With ranges that can hit the same distance as Laser Rifles (who's skills are broken, btw - so you can't say it's over-powered if the damned skills don't even work on it) with the second highest DPS in the game, with the fourth highest magazine count in the game.

I previously had a thread stating that the range needed to be nerfed and like this thread it was met with stiff opposition with retorts like, "well, in real life assault rifles can hit out to 300-400 yards" but they never could clarify if those ranges were made on full-auto or not; or even with a rifle that doesn't have recoil once you get to level five Operation.

if I was filimg it I would show, but I have a heavy dropsuit fitting with 100 shield 953 armour and a guy in proto with a kill switch Gek dropped in the instant he seen me

The assault rifle is the "jack of all trades", which means it functions well in almost all scenarios. Which is also the reason an assault rifle is the "standard" soldier weapon.

More specialised weapons are meant for more specialised tasks. Which means that when they go up against an AR outside of their comfort zone, they should be at a disadvantage.

There is only an issue when an AR actually beats (or equals) a specialised weapon in that weapons role. So, for instance, if you could snipe more efficiently with an AR than a Sniper rifle. Or mow down a cluster of reddots at short to medium range quicker than an HMG.Or destroy a tank faster than a Forge Gun. Etcetera, etcetera.

Now, I'm not saying that that is not the case (though I think it isn't all that bad overall, but there might be some specialised roles that an AR is slightly to good at). But simply saying AR's need to be nerfed in general is way to simplified. If anything, (some of) the specialised weapons need to be buffed in their respective role.

Right, but that's what we're seeing currently. It's not uncommon for Assault Rifle users to take out Heavies before they themselves get killed and that's mostly due to the sheer damage output of the weapon. The HMG might have a higher RoF but what we're seeing is more damage landing on target from the Assault Rifle (direct stream versus cone of fire).

At low levels the HMG is king, but towards the higher tiers it's very common that the Assault Rifle will outright defeat the HMG at those ranges or even more.

I understand what you're saying, I do - the Assault Rifle is supposed to be a jack of all trades but at the moment it's more a King of all Trades in that it excels in every aspect.

If you want to get even more technical, the Assault Rifle has a headshot efficiency of 165% compared to the HMG's 140%. Even then, the HMG's efficiency (center mass) starts at 95%, so you're not even getting the full damage that you could be. By stark contrast, the Assault Rifle starts at 110% so you're already getting a bonus just for firing at the target in your effective range.

To make matters worse the HMG doesn't ever go above 95% from 0m - 40/50m, and only goes lower from there.

There are a LOT of factors that make the Assault Rifle King in this game and they're being blindly defended. People just say "stop the QQ" or simply state that it doesn't need to be fixed. Unfortunately, they are very very wrong. Recoil, as I've previously said, is non-existent. Cross that with damage mods (potentially) not taking stacking penalties and it's the obvious choice of weaponry for high tier games.

There can't be much specialization in a game where one weapon can essentially dominate 60% of the playing field. Sniper Rifles and Laser Rifles excel at long range, Shotguns excel at short range, the Assault Rifle on the other hand suffers no drawbacks from ranges except at extremely long range.

Some food for thought: http://symthic.com/bf3-weapon-charts

You'll notice that many of those weapons all have the same damage ratios and ranges, but suffer from varying degrees of recoil. Based on my usage of the Assault Rifle in Dust 514, I've honestly come to the determination that (at least when using ADS) the Recoil is purely animation based as most if not all of my shots will land on target if I have the sights lined up.

I can't say more than that. I've decided not to use them because it offers me more of a challenge not to, but I have looked into them in order to relay the information I'm providing.

I don't disagree with you, in essence. As I said, the AR might well be a bit too good at some specific roles (or, the specialised weapon isn't good enough).

I don't know if it's quite as bad as you imply though...

When it comes to range, an AR has nothing on a Sniper Rifle. Sure, the effective range of the AR isn't small, so you can use it quite well to kill at a "relatively large" distance. But you can't use it to kill someone on the other side of the map. I guess the biggest issue here is probably map size. If maps aren't all that big, Sniper Rifles have less use by definition.

In CQC, the issue might be slightly bigger. But I'm not sure that's really preventable without having silly systems in place. I mean, if you are in my face and I have a fully automatic assault rifle, you're in trouble. A shotgun is still more effective due to requiring less precise aim as well as having more power per shot. I.e. aim in general direction, pull trigger (maybe twice), win. An HMG has other pro's and con's, but in my experience if I get into the path and range of a heavy wielding an HMG, he has a distinct advantage in that encounter.

Other more specialised roles are often so far from an AR in functionality it's hard to really compare them. MD's, Forge Guns... I really wouldn't know how to determine whether these are "balanced" or not in respect to an AR.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with you. But, I think it is inevitable that the AR will be the most common weapon. I also think it is inevitable that it will be very good in most situations. It's the basis of the design of an Assault Rifle: A versatile weapon that performs well in most situations that a soldier might encounter. I think most real AR's actually even have a semi-auto, burst and full-auto function built in, which we need to use different AR's for in this game. Specialised weapons are meant for specialised tasks. They are usually not meant to go one-on-one with an AR. It also doesn't make sense to have many people using specialised weapons.

I don't necessarily like to make real-world comparisons, as this is a game and should be about good gameplay more than realism, but I feel it's hard not to in this case. Take a look at the wikipedia entry for "assault rifle". One thing jumps out at me: "Assault rifles are the standard service rifles in most modern armies." The entry explains at length why that is. Other weapons are used in armies, but the basic infantry will use AR's.

Sniper rifles have a very distinct role and are very useful. But you don't have an army full of snipers.
Shotguns have their use as well in specific CQC situations as well as a panic defense weapon, but for general infantry work... not really.
Submachine guns are usually used in tighter situations and versus unarmored opponents. In the military, they are mostly replaced by AR's.

The HMG as we have it in game is hard to compare to "real life" situations, since HMG's are usually mounted or at least stationary. Technically, the HMG should be superior in all aspects (barring the use for more precision that an AR would allow by single/burst shooting), and should be effective both against infantry as well as (light) vehicles. That's a lot to give to a class that also has very high survivability if it's all to be balanced with reduced mobility...

Iff thats the case I'm going gek and damage mods, goin tank hunting

I welcome real world examples to an extent.

A big big factor that a lot of people forget when using them in the defense of Assault Rifle is, as I previously stated, recoil. It's one thing to have reduced recoil per level but when you get to a certain point the bullets are all going to hit on target and the only thing that I've personally seen at the 80m+ range is that the weapon's efficiency goes down, not the accuracy.

Each bullet will hit near center mass of where the user is aiming and the only thing stopping those rounds from doing their full damage is due to the efficiency dropping at those ranges. I don't really feel this should be the case. It's one thing if it's a Tactical Assault Rifle, which is semi-automatic, but a gun firing nearly -13 rounds per second- is going to have some hellacious recoil.

There's a reason they teach you to fire in short, controlled bursts in the military. This game seems to have completely missed that logic. Just hold down the trigger and you're good to go.

Honestly, I don't care what happens but something has to happen to drop the Assault Rifle down a notch in order to inspire more specialization. It's pointless otherwise. Why use a weapon that only works from 40m+ (laser rifle) when I just use the weapon that can work at maximum efficiency and still cover the range? I like the shotgun but there's not much room for error and sometimes the gun will derp out and not register damage at all (ask some other users about this).

Recoil, Range, Damage, Bullet Spread... Dunno. It's just annoying seeing a stream of bullets flying out of the gun and knowing they're going exactly where they're being aimed at.

Also, it doesn't make any sense lore-wise being as it's Gallentean and almost certainly a blaster, which is supposed to have the shortest range when compared with similar weapons. Makes me think that if we have get a Heavy Blaster similar to an HMG that it's going to have shotgun range, while projectile assault rifles are going to be acing headshots at 150m+......

I've been seeing lots of guys kill people outside of scanner range. I feel like a GEK being fired should light up the shooter on the radar? What are everyone's thoughts?

Lr also needs changing, less armor damage and recoil or some kind of thermal output that disrupts the shooter's pov

Seriously when a guy with a gek does 1000dmg in 1 secon, weapons OP

yeah.. dont whine about that, its a friggin' projected energy laser at a high enough frequency to melt armor. if you're having issues with that, then learn to move fast between cover. the only time LR is dangerous to armor is near the emergency heat vent temp, and that takes over half a battery to do. and there is something to distort sight with the laser rifle, its a bunch of plasma vapors that come up in your face when you aim with it.

Again, Damage Mods without stacking penalties. The weapons are fine, its the Damage Mods.

Again, Damage Mods without stacking penalties. The weapons are fine, its the Damage Mods.

Please read my post(s). I understand that it's a wall of text but the Assault Rifles don't need Damage Mods to be overly lethal with just a few rounds.

500 Damage per Second will kill almost anything in this game, and that's not taking into account the innate bonus from weapon efficiency (110%) or headshot bonuses (165%). Heavies may survive the first second of fire but being as they can't move out of the bullet stream they almost inevitably will NOT survive the second second.

.... Lol. Second second.

Not quite so. While yes, the stacking penalties are not being applied to Damage Mods at this time it really isn't much of a difference.

EVE-Wiki: Stacking Penalties

3x 10% damage modifiers with compound bonus: 33%
3x 10% damage modifiers with no penalty: 30%
3x 10% damage modifiers with stacking penalty: 26.4%

Difference: 5.6% / 2.6% depending on if its compound or not. That's roughly 25 DPS extra for the Duvolle. Not much.

Now 4x modifiers does get a bit broken. 44% compounded vs 29.9% with penalty. That's roughly 75 DPS extra for the Duvolle. But that requires a Proto VK.0 Logi or Proto VK.1 Assault / Logi to fit.

The real problem is the lack of recoil and the clip size as others have stated before. The AR can hit you at 80+ meters dead on with continuous automatic fire and put out near it's full DPS. And since it's so accurate excellent players can get a stream of headshots and just decimate. If there was spread or recoil at longer ranges then the AR would be better. Heck, keeping it's stats the same but having it get more inaccurate the longer you fired would probably stop most of the issues. That would line it up with reality, keep it as a versatile weapon, but ensue that it isn't the King of all Trades it is close to being today.

Have to agree. I played a Type-A and VK.0 Heavy with 1000+ armor. I should fear the Laser Rifle and it's armor melting craziness or the Shotgun and its ability to blast me to shreds. But I actually fear the Assault Rifle and it's ability to seemingly hit me from anywhere, regardless of cover, with a stream of bullets that rips my armor to shreds in half a second with precision accuracy.

Needless to say I don't play Armor Heavies anymore. Losing a 100K Proto Heavy suit to a Duvolle in 1.3 seconds when I had 1000+ HP was infuriating. It very well could be me sucking, or it could be that there's a slight problem when I fear the jack of all trades weapon 50x more than the weapons specifically designed to counter my class (IE: LR and Shotgun).

Yay English!

I agree that the AR isn't 'OP' but it is definitely the Master of all Trades.

I have stopped using other weapons that I *WANT* to use (Mass Driver and Laser Rifle) because I die at least twice, if not three, times more often.

My suggestion would be to have only Advanced tier and higher grades of ARs be fully automatic. All others should be burst fire.

Disagree. This would impact players by forcing them to use a weapon that they may not be accustomed to and (very much in the same sense of what you're going through) force them to use a weapon they don't -want- to use.

I agree that the AR isn't 'OP' but it is definitely the Master of all Trades.

I have stopped using other weapons that I *WANT* to use (Mass Driver and Laser Rifle) because I die at least twice, if not three, times more often.

My suggestion would be to have only Advanced tier and higher grades of ARs be fully automatic. All others should be burst fire.

I praise Aeon Amadi and others for valiantly making the case for balancing the Assault Rifle (yet again), but come on guys, we've been down this road before.
All we did was lose the AR variant that we love the most.... the Tac. (A true precision weapon that required skill.)

As logical and backed by numbers as they may be, I doubt CCP agrees with the arguments. Their actions reveal this:
-Tighter red zones overall were implemented in Ambush, to ensure everyone was within range of AR ( and dropships within range of AV).

- Scopes removed from the full-auto ARs made a superficial and temporary hit to overall AR accuracy. The "kick" and so-called "recoil" added takes a little over 3 seconds to appear, and is BARELY there when it does. (Come on, they knew this didn't change anything.)

If the ARs work as the devs intended, then surely they know that a fully spec'd assault with fully spec'd AR is the King of the battlefield. Niches be damned.

That's why I asked for ARs to become a sidearm, and Vermaak Doe asked for carbine sidearm variants. If the weapon can't be rebalanced, we should at least get access to it.

But I still stand by this OP and the arguments for rebalance presented.

I stated this, actually. The Tactical Assault Rifle needs it's recoil knocked down a notch, the Breach needs a damage increase and the Assault Rifle needs -something- done to it to even it out with all of the other variants.

The Burst I'm mixed about. Not sure why the hell it has a seven round burst but it's just as deadly as the regular Assault Rifle, only difference is the delay between shots at least allows you some breathing room to strafe in between the bullet streams (provided you lived through the first one).

yeah.. dont whine about that, its a friggin' projected energy laser at a high enough frequency to melt armor. if you're having issues with that, then learn to move fast between cover. the only time LR is dangerous to armor is near the emergency heat vent temp, and that takes over half a battery to do. and there is something to distort sight with the laser rifle, its a bunch of plasma vapors that come up in your face when you aim with it.

Problem is unlike the hmg it melts both it's target for a defense (shields) and what it should be doing less damage to (armor). Also I've used it for a long time, I'm pretty sure I've got an accurate critique on it. Also if that really distorts your aim you have brightness too high

100% agree. People had been whining about LR needed a nerf. I've always said it'd be fine if armor had like double the resistance to lasers that it has now.

Quite the contrary, this is only acceptable in the case that there is a weapon of similar design which can work against armor in the same right. 90% efficiency against shields and 135% against armor, vice versa. There currently is no other weapon similar in design and thereby it's fine the way it is.

The assault rifle is the "jack of all trades", which means it functions well in almost all scenarios. Which is also the reason an assault rifle is the "standard" soldier weapon.

More specialised weapons are meant for more specialised tasks. Which means that when they go up against an AR outside of their comfort zone, they should be at a disadvantage.

There is only an issue when an AR actually beats (or equals) a specialised weapon in that weapons role. So, for instance, if you could snipe more efficiently with an AR than a Sniper rifle. Or mow down a cluster of reddots at short to medium range quicker than an HMG.Or destroy a tank faster than a Forge Gun. Etcetera, etcetera.

Now, I'm not saying that that is not the case (though I think it isn't all that bad overall, but there might be some specialised roles that an AR is slightly to good at). But simply saying AR's need to be nerfed in general is way to simplified. If anything, (some of) the specialised weapons need to be buffed in their respective role.

.....With that in mind, the Assault Rifle wins almost all the time simply due to the fact that it's user is inevitably going to be more mobile, more accurate, more versatile and have a substantially tighter bullet spread.....

So the smg, hmg, and mass driver are from my imagination?

I always thought of Heavies as a suppression platform, Assault clears a path to the next cover, heavy moves up and starts laying suppression for the Assault to move to the new cover. Heavy constantly laying down DPS whether there is something there to shoot or not. Make them keep their heads down.

In this case, of course a up close Assault will always win, they are supposed to be more mobile, accurate and versatile. They are the base runners.

(If I didn't misread what you said) you claimed that no other weapon worked against armor in a similar fashion when those weapons clearly do more damage to armor, while not out to the same range the mass driver deals more raw damage

Rather than nerf the AR as was originally suggested I would prefer to see other weapons buffed in their specialised area, HMG's could get a higher ROF (which should increase heat buildup accordingly and muzzle climb as well) thus returning them to the close medium range red berry juicer that they should be IMO (you can even pull it's range back to 50m for all I care) and LRs could get a higher damage at near max range with a reduced close range damage maybe. And that would give you something more than hopes and dreams to try and spec into something other than ARs.

My greatest concern about this topic was realised last night actually where I ran in a match and I was the ONLY player using something other than an AR (call bs if you want but thats what I saw), there where players in different suits, heavy type 2s and scout B series but they were all using advanced to proto AR's, why because in most of the maps we currently play on it is the best weapon for a quickly changing battle as it can offer almost HMG dps (20% less for a standard level weapon) in a package that can fire almost as far as and LR that can be used well in CQC. I don't blame the AR it does what it says on the tin, but I would just like to see more incentive to use the specialised weapons heck I'm thinking about using the AR just so I can stay in the game.

Ok so I don't have the game screen in front of me right now so let's see if I can do this from memory. (Just base stats of the weapon, not counting proficiency and weaponry upgrades or damage mods)

Prototype AR does what, 34 damage per bullet, at roughly 750 rpm, that works out to 750/60=12.5 bullets/sec @ 34 damage each = 34x12.5=425 damage per sec. 34 damage per bullet x 60 in the mag = 2040 per mag. 60 sec / 12.5 bullets per sec = empty mag in 4.8 sec.

Standard HMG does 19 damage per bullet, fires at roughly 2000 rpm, that works out to 2000/60sec = 33.33333333333 (we will say 33.3) bullets/sec @ 19 damage per bullet = 19x33.3= 632.7 damage per sec. 19 damage x 450? in the mag (overheat if constant fire leaves about 120 left) so 330 = 6270 damage per full mag to overheat.

You claim that your suit has an EHP of 1053 and he's dropping you instantly, assuming he lands every shot it requires 1053 EHP / 425 damage per sec = 2.477 sec of sustained fire with 100% accuracy to kill your suit.

The standard HMG does 3.07x more damage per full sustained fire cycle than the prototype AR, and 1.4887x damage over the prototype AR per sec.

Inside each weapons optimal range, you are dead regardless if you can land every shot.
The problem you are having is because of damage mods (which can be applied to both of these types of weapons I have listed)

How does the AR need a nerf?

Rethink your situation and how you got killed, learn from it, learn to counter it instead of just posting yet another stupid "Nerf X because it kills me in Y suit" thread.

TL;DR - READ IT BEFORE YOU MAKE ANOTHER STUPID POST PLEASE.
Also, if there are any errors in actual game values of just the weapons before enhancements (skills or mods) keep in mind this is just from memory and not having any in game into in front of me.

ARs dont have a sight that can really be used......maybe that will change with weapon customization but who knows when that will be implemented. And the issue stating that there is no recoil.............well I dont know what game your playing but if I continuously shoot then at about 25-30 rounds the AR has some pretty extreme recoil. Considering that and the SMG are the only guns that seemingly have recoil I dont consider this an issue.

if I was filimg it I would show, but I have a heavy dropsuit fitting with 100 shield 953 armour and a guy in proto with a kill switch Gek dropped in the instant he seen me

Then get a tank. I usually kill 15 proto suits in a match.

I believe that protoman has already stated that he is more than willing for the HMG to be allowed on the Assault suit so that he can roll it and show people how to use it properly.

Also your argument at the end is regarding the broken dmg mods which should be fixed. Instead of nerfing a weapon that may or may not be benefiting from the broken dmg mods why dont you fix those first?

-Even at 95% efficiency the dmg output it much greater than the AR. Oh and ARs get less efficient against armor but gets a slight bonus on sheilds.
-Not all AR rounds land on target either as while HMGs have a small cone fire ARs have recoil
-I honestly dont know if the standard AR can hit beyond 100 meters the tact AR can but that is worthless right now
-HMG also has 450 mag size so you dont have to reload very often but if you do it takes a while. ARs have to reload after 1 maybe 2 kills. Since HMGs can easily kill 6 guys without reloading we can assume 6 kills then 8 second reload. ARs assuming 2 kills per mag has to spend 9 seconds in reload.

-Lasers dont have to contend with a horrible ADS sight that basically nullifies the supposed 100+m range that the ARs have
-Lasers when firing strip sheilds at 120% and when it heats up they do massive dmg although its unknown what that value is considering it burns through a heavy with 1000K armor faster than the Duvolle we can assume its pretty high
-The dmg done to the user when the laser overheats is laughable at best. I have never overheated my laser on accident and when I did it on purpose it dinged my shields. Yes the skills for laser are broken but I bet that you actually get all of the skills by putting 1 lvl into it because otherwise the laser wont ever overheat since it only overheats after 80ish rounds.
-I do think the lasers need a bit of work but I am willing to wait until the issue with the broken skills get fixed and then look at them again.
-ARs when taking dmg had to deal with even more recoil while no other weapon has this detriment of...if being shot making it harder to aim and return fire

ARs can be competetive in most situations but the SMG/HMG/Shotgun beat it in close range, the HMG can beat it in mid range, Laser can beat it in mid/long range and sniper beats it in super long range, MDs cause aiming to move off so can be good in most ranges if the aim is good. If you consider the actual mathematical values the AR loses to these weapons in stats. Which means its more the user who determines how good it is.

If you consider the actual mathematical values the AR loses to these weapons in stats. Which means its more the user who determines how good it is.

Then by that right you should have no issue using the Assault Rifle to it's maximum capability to be able to kill any other player by versatility alone as it has -no drawbacks-.

And don't say recoil, your first skill reduces the recoil so that's not exactly admissible.

To be honest, I have no clue how to respond to your argument being as you're basically saying that the Assault Rifle should be able to overpower the HMG - which it shouldn't. The HMG is perfectly balanced in it's current iteration and the Assault Rifle should -not- be able to down a heavy in as little as two seconds of continuous fire. Heavy can't move out of the way as well as an Assault Suit, so it's a matter of the Assault Suit moving out of the way of the Heavy's fire - something that's not hard to do.

And I am hard pressed to believe that "not all rounds land on target" with an Assault Rifle, the only time that ever happens is due to user error. The gun can land shots accurately and consistently well over 80m+ if you put some time to train sharpshooter and there's a lot of people who have.

I get destroyed by heavies all the time, what game are you playing? Two seconds is also a damn long time, an HMG will ruin your day in much less than a second if the user is skilled.

I think what's happening here is a case of misunderstanding. The AR is easier to skill into and therefore players are "better" more quickly. If we pit proto AR vs proto HMG in a mano e mano duel the HMG will win within optimal HANDS DOWN. The AR will obviously destroy him at longer ranges because that's it's drawiback: It isn't better than any weapon in their designed roles.

I get destroyed by heavies all the time, what game are you playing? Two seconds is also a damn long time, an HMG will ruin your day in much less than a second if the user is skilled.

I think what's happening here is a case of misunderstanding. The AR is easier to skill into and therefore players are "better" more quickly. If we pit proto AR vs proto HMG in a mano e mano duel the HMG will win within optimal HANDS DOWN. The AR will obviously destroy him at longer ranges because that's it's drawiback: It isn't better than any weapon in their designed roles.

Then by that right you should have no issue using the Assault Rifle to it's maximum capability to be able to kill any other player by versatility alone as it has -no drawbacks-.

And don't say recoil, your first skill reduces the recoil so that's not exactly admissible.

To be honest, I have no clue how to respond to your argument being as you're basically saying that the Assault Rifle should be able to overpower the HMG - which it shouldn't. The HMG is perfectly balanced in it's current iteration and the Assault Rifle should -not- be able to down a heavy in as little as two seconds of continuous fire. Heavy can't move out of the way as well as an Assault Suit, so it's a matter of the Assault Suit moving out of the way of the Heavy's fire - something that's not hard to do.

And I am hard pressed to believe that "not all rounds land on target" with an Assault Rifle, the only time that ever happens is due to user error. The gun can land shots accurately and consistently well over 80m+ if you put some time to train sharpshooter and there's a lot of people who have.

I love this. AR is OP but DONT TOUCH MY LASER YOU H8TR!!

Sheesh people work so hard to protect the gun they use while trying to get all over weapons lowered.

Someone noted that the HMG is out damaged by the AR but forget to note that it does 19 dmg at 2000 RPM so it does 633 dmg per second which is alot higher than the ARs 426.25 dmg per second (not including any bonuses). Some people have noted that the GEK does 42 dmg per shot (not including dmg mods)....what GEK are you using? I want that one cause mine only does the normal 32 dmg per shot (not including dmg mods). ARs are the only weapon other than SMGs that have to deal with serious recoil. HMG no recoil and get more accurate than an AR over time.....Laser no recoil and massive dmg increase over time.....Shotguns are just death machines and can be used a little further out of CQC very effectively if you have SP in it....mass drivers make it so that they cannot be shot back due to the explosive blast that knocks your aim around.....SMGs rip people to shreds once points are put into the range.......Pistols have a 450% HS multiplier that can insta kill most suits......sniper are hit scan loleasy to use.

ARs dont have a sight that can really be used......maybe that will change with weapon customization but who knows when that will be implemented. And the issue stating that there is no recoil.............well I dont know what game your playing but if I continuously shoot then at about 25-30 rounds the AR has some pretty extreme recoil. Considering that and the SMG are the only guns that seemingly have recoil I dont consider this an issue.

I'm rethinking releasing my 1v1 heavy montage video.....it will bring tears for real.

Lasers are definitely top 2 of most cheasiest weapons in the game. It's funny when people say lasers are only good at long distances but forget that laser users equip themselves with smgs just in case someone sneaks up on them.

noooo! your montages are awesome, and dubbs try using a laser on a logi then you're stuck with it in all situations

Lasers are definitely top 2 of most cheasiest weapons in the game. It's funny when people say lasers are only good at long distances but forget that laser users equip themselves with smgs just in case someone sneaks up on them.

Wow, so the Laser Rifle is over-powered because someone thought ahead of time to use a freaggin sidearm?

Someone alert the Snipers that they're not allowed to carry a sidearm because then they'd have situational control!!!

What is the counter to lasers except hiding, when they are across the map and will melt you in 2 secs? Not to mention...the damage increases as you hold the trigger plus no recoil, etc.

Labeling weapons as "cheese" is childish at best. If you want to know about ease of use though, and ease and regularities of kills, well the AR is at the top of the list. It isn't just used by most players because it's one of the starter fits, it's used so much because it is the most useful, ie easiest, weapons to use.

Note : I am not supporting a nerf to the AR, I think nerfing is bad in general.

Move out of optimal range. Pretty much the same as every other weapon in the game. Other than that, try tactics, I hear that works as well.

lol such a practical response right there.

Only the first lesson is free.

All I'm hearing from this is:

"Laser Rifle is overpowered because it performs suppression better than the HMG - the gun that's DESIGNED for suppression - because I can out maneuver a Heavy."

So you're purposefully being ignorant, it's problem is that it cuts through armor the same way it does through shields

I've already discounted everything you say simply because you contradict everything that I post in -literally every thread-.

Can't verify the validity of your statements if they seem to consistently be trolling.

EVEN IF THAT WEREN'T THE CASE - you can't say the damned thing is overpowered when it doesn't even work properly. The skills affecting it don't work, so please do us all a favor and stfu because you're truly being ignorant by saying that it is. There's a major difference between having an opinion and speaking on it in contrast to deliberating attempting to get something knocked down because you don't understand it's mechanics nor have any sympathy for the fact that it might not even be working as intended.

Now that you're done ranting like an ignorant child ADMIT THE DAMAGE VS ARMOR IS BROKEN. Despite it being intended to do less damage to armor INCLUDING DURING THE DAMAGE INCREASE it does the exact same damage to both which is utter bullsh*t for a weapon meant to damage shields. Do you ever see smgs, mass drivers, or hmgs give the same dps towards shields and armor? Yes, the skills are broken but so is the amount of damage applied to armor, which offsets the broken skills. You whine that the Ar is broken all day only to ignore the fact that the lr is too, open your damn eyes .

Seriously when a guy with a gek does 1000dmg in 1 secon, weapons OP

You've officially flabbergasted me with your idiocracy. You have absolutely no evidence to back up your claim as you have yet to even state what the damage efficiency is, a story to provide background to your claims or statistical evidence of either, whereas I have provided EXTENSIVE evidence to support my opinions, theories and hypothesis.

Beyond that, you're deliberately trolling and henceforth any response that even has your name - in any thread - will be considered as such. Good day sir.